Thursday, 1 May 2014

Interesting developments in Pembrokeshire this morning where, at an extraordinary general meeting, councillors voted to write to the Chief Executive, Bryn Parry Jones, and another unnamed officer, to ask them to repay the illegal pension 'pay supplements', which total £45,606.

The motion to 'demand' the repayments had been amended to 'request' after it was feared further legal costs would be incurred.
It remains to be seen whether Mr Parry Jones will feel morally obliged to repay the cash.

I'm sure interested parties from over the border in Carmarthenshire will be watching what happens with interest....

BBC Wales has reported on the decision here, and the Western Mail here.

The background, of course, were the Wales Audit Office findings over unlawful pension payments made to both Mark James of Carmarthenshire County Council and Mr Parry Jones in Pembrokeshire.

In Carmarthenshire, there were additional findings of unlawfulness concerning the libel indemnity paid to Mr James, who 'stepped aside' from his post on the 14th February.
The Carmarthenshire WAO libel indemnity report can be found here, and the pension report here.

Gloucestershire Police are continuing with their investigations.

Pembrokeshire Councillors also considered whether to extend the current webcasting to all open meetings. Despite excellent arguments put forward in favour, the motion was sadly defeated by 30 votes to 22.

I will provide links to both these items when the webcast is archived. (3rd May; Here's a link to the agenda which has handy links to the relevant sections of the webcast under each item, the pension repayment is item 4, webcasting is item 5)

I understand that Carmarthenshire Council's Executive Board has recommended that with total viewing figures of over 26,000 for the pilot, webcasting of full council meetings will continue for another three years.

There is no word on whether it will be extended to all open meetings, neither is there any mention whether or not members of the public will be allowed to make their own recordings, a right which is becoming enshrined in law in England.

'The Claimant is a housewife, mother and amateur blogger. The defendants are a council and a chief executive. It is literally state versus citizen. In a large part, the origins of the entire case derive from the issue of getting ones voice heard at all'

'In light of the evidence, the allegations of perverting the course of justice are unsustainable. This is the most serious allegation and the Claimant deserves to have her reputation vindicated...Mr Davies' evidence was incoherent, confused and contradicted [his] statements given at the time...in short, Mr Davies' evidence of what happened has completely changed and he cannot be relied on'

(From closing submission for the claimant at trial, February 2013)

...In August 2016, following a very belated (three years later) complaint to the police by Mark James that I perverted the course of justice, the investigation was dropped as there was no evidence.

There never was going to be any evidence as I told the truth, on oath, at the time.